Without a doubt, the action of the Government of Mexico to seek to stop the violence in our country with an unprecedented action seems commendable, 11 companies that produce weapons in the United States have been sued by the authorities of our country, for which reason they consider negligent actions that have led to an indiscriminate trafficking of arms that supplies organized crime.
However, the complexity of the issue will have to be put into context, since the limitations for a North American to be able to acquire a weapon legally are as varied as states have the American Union, where there are some with strict regulations and others where the observance is less. .
The legal ownership of arms in the United States is generalized and protected by the Bill of Rights, or Bill of Rights, specifically in the second amendment to the Constitution that says: “A well-ordered militia is necessary for the security of a free State , the right of the people to own and bear arms will not be violated ”.
This has allowed people without a criminal record to buy weapons that are delivered in an ant trade to criminal groups that operate in the United States and they introduce them to Mexico with surprising ease, since it is estimated that there are some 15 million weapons introduced from illegal way to the country.
Most were purchased from businesses located in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas according to the US Agency for Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
In those states bordering Mexico there are about 22 thousand armories and establishments authorized for sale. Part of the problem begins in those places, as documented by authorities in both countries.
How far can Mexico’s lawsuit proceed? when the arms manufacturers legally sell their products in the United States, and the traffic begins in the intermediaries. But there is another interesting issue, weapons enter through the northern border, where customs have been a source of corruption that has allowed them to enter illegally. And I dare to question further, compensation is sought from the manufacturer of arms of the United States, while here the buyer of these weapons is not touched.